Police and protesters confront each other during a clash in Civic Center Park

As we wait for U.S. District Court Judge Robert Blackburn to make his ruling on Occupy Denver’s request for a temporary restraining order, I thought I could share a few extra nuggets that emerged during yesterday’s nearly 8-hour proceedings. (See my story in today’s paper about the hearing for an overview of the legal debate, plus a mention of Denver police officers who allegedly set up a fake Twitter account to harass Occupy Denver members.)

Who’s in charge?
It wasn’t surprising to see Occupy Denver supporters, under questioning on the witness stand, hedge on whether to call themselves leaders of the protest. After all, the movement prides itself on being non-hierarchical. But, it turns out, Occupy Denver isn’t the only organization out at Civic Center Park that gives its members a lot of autonomy. Denver Police Division Chief David Quinones testified that the decisions on how to enforce the city ordinances in dispute are ultimately left up to the officers on the ground. Quinones repeatedly rebutted the suggestion that the city had a detailed policy on how to respond to Occupy Denver. “They have a lot of discretion,” Quinones said of the officers. Quinones also said he had not received any orders from Police Chief Gerry Whitman on how to deal with the movement. “I kept him apprised of what was happening,” Quinones said.

How long will it last?
As commenters in a previous post of mine about Occupy Denver noted, one thing that differentiates the protest from other events is the duration. While other protests might also trample some city ordinances, they also have an expected end date. Meanwhile, it’s not clear when Occupy Denver members might decide to pack up camp. Assistant city attorney Stuart Shapiro tried to draw out that distinction when cross-examining the day’s first witness, Occupy Denver supporter Tanner Spendley. Shapiro pressed Spendley several times on how long the movement intended to stay in the park. Spendley, who had earlier said the movement would be in the park “a long time,” ultimately ducked the question.

Confident man
Before starting his cross-examination of Quinones, Occupy attorney David Lane seemed certain he had the goods. He turned to the Occupy Denver members in the audience and stage-whispered: “Don’t react to anything.”

Drawing a line
As Quinones noted, Denver police have looked the other way as Occupy protesters violated a number of city ordinances. The department, for instance, has provided traffic control for the movement’s marches, even though those marches do not have permits. And, while police have stopped protesters from putting up tents or tables on the sidewalks, they have allowed protesters to lay out sleeping bags and tarps. So where’s the line? Quinones said police are allowing people to keep personal items that can be carried, such as backpacks and sleeping bags. But they are also mindful of not letting the protesters get too much of a toehold. When asked why police are strictly enforcing the curfew ordinance for Civic Center Park, Quinones said that, if they didn’t, “I believe the park will be overrun by people taking up camping in the park.” He said that would worsen problems he contended police have seen in Occupy Denver: fights, fires, drug overdoses and at least one sexual assault.

Gearing up
Many of the clashes between police and protesters have come over tents, awnings or other structures being erected in the park. Lane, though, said Occupy Denver would be able to pitch a single tent or awning if it had a permit to use the park. Failure to get a permit before erecting a tent is a petty offense, Lane noted in questioning why police needed to be in riot gear to take on such an offense. “What we’re really talking about is, for lack of a permit, the Denver police geared up for a battle with protesters,” he said. Quinones countered that police needed to be in riot gear not because of the offense committed but because of the offenders. The large crowds that gather when police try to enforce the no-tents-without-a-permit ordinance necessitate that officers take steps to protect themselves. “I just assumed,” Quinones said, in explaining the need for riot gear when confronting protesters, “they wanted a fight.”

The conflict is the message
The temporary restraining order asks that Denver be barred from enforcing a handful of ordinances against the protesters because, the request argues, those ordinances are being used to suppress the protest. But Occupy Denver supporters contended during the hearing that the police presence, itself, is perhaps a much bigger hindrance to the movement. Supporters said clashes with police — which they maintained were initiated by the cops (which the city denied) — give the movement a bad name. One protester said the clashes have derailed the protest, causing Occupy Denver members to focus more on police response than on getting out their message. Another alleged that the clashes were calculated to drive people away. “People say they will not attend any protest,” said Occupy Denver member Robert Piper, “because they fear the Denver Police Department.” The restraining order request, even if successful, might not solve the issue because it doesn’t ask that protesters be allowed to erect structures in the park.

The Hancock connection
A key thing for Occupy Denver to prove is that Denver police have enforced the contested ordinances differently against the movement than they have in other, similar situations. To that end, Lane brought out a list of then-mayoral candidate Michael Hancock’s “honk ‘n wave” events, in which politicians and their backers stand on a street corner and encourage passing drivers to honk in support. If the police don’t ticket drivers for honking for politicians, why did they tickets at least one Occupy Denver supporter for honking in solidarity with the movement? The police this year have issued 11 tickets for car-horn violations. None of those occurred on the date of Hancock honk ‘n waves.

Occupy Denver and Sniagrab, part II
Along these same lines of equal enforcement, Lane hit on a topic I raised earlier: If Occupy Denver can’t pitch tents on the sidewalk, why can people camping out for Sniagrab? Alas, no new information came out as to the legal difference between the two. City attorneys did not clarify whether Sniagrab has a permit for its sidewalk tents. Quinones said he wasn’t aware of any tickets ever written for tents at Sniagrab, which he seemed only vaguely aware of.

“Extremely loud” or “quite dainty”?
To the extent there was any moment of levity during the hearing, it occurred during discussion of Natalie Wyatt’s airhorn. Wyatt was ticketed for blowing an airhorn out the window of a moving car in support of Occupy Denver, an event she said was an unconstitutional violation of free speech. Assistant city attorney Wendy Shea, in cross-examining Wyatt, didn’t refer to the horn as an airhorn but rather, multiple times, called it an “extremely loud airhorn.” Lane seemed amused at the tactic and later quizzed Occupy Denver member Robert Schultz, who witnessed Wyatt’s ticketing, about the volume of the airhorn. “It was actually quite dainty,” Schultz offered. The little disagreement, though, could prove pivotal. Denver attorneys argued that Wyatt’s ticket was for an extraordinary violation — not just honking a car horn when there was no emergency, but blowing a loud, disruptive airhorn. Her ticket was for disturbing the peace. In the same way, city attorneys argued that Daniel Garcia, the only known person to be ticketed for honking a car horn in support of Occupy Denver, wasn’t ticketed just for the horn honk. Instead, they said Garcia honked once, circled the block, then honked again. People continue to drive by Occupy Denver and honk without being ticketed, city attorneys claimed.

I love how the politicians seem to pass the buck by NOT giving any instructions. Plausible deniability is what they call it in Washington. I have viewed some of the video tapes, and I find that some of the officers seemed to be pushing the protesters with great force.

DRiving to the Capital Building today at about 10 AM I noticed several people sleeping on the sidewalk on Colfax near the Capital. I would have thought that the police would have cleared these people earlier in the morning. But the excuse seems to be that they are being constrained by having a dozen or so police cars by the park.